Welcome to DBSTalk

Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!

I would say there is no way in H*ll Dish will pay those kind of prices for the Pac 10, Pac 12, or Pac anything..... Just how many expensive channels can carriers keep carrying and still keep prices down? Let Direct TV carry them, and keep their cost higher. That gives a choice to us all. I don't want to pay what my friends do for Direct because I can live without alot of the expensive sports channels. On the other side, they are willing to pay more to get them. So there is the choice.

well when it comes to the Big Ten network pending dispute, just let you know, it's co-owned by Fox and the Big Ten Conference, so that means we are in for yet another blackout dispute, and after the one we went thought in 2010 with Fox, which co-owns this network, we clearly will lose the Big Ten Network. if the Pac-12 network isn't co-owned by Disney, it might be co-owned by Fox, which would be their way to bundle Pac-12 Network with the Big Ten Network. meanwhile Disney/ESPN co-owns the The Longhorn Network with the University of Texas in Austin, which is pretty much the closest the Big XII has to it's own 24/7 RSN channel.

one story short, it's gonna be a long college football season for fans of the Texas Longhorns, a Big Ten or Pac-12 school or anyone who wants to see any game on ESPN-U in HD.

Dish Network Customer since Jan 2007, upgraded to HD on September 2, 2010.

I would say there is no way in H*ll Dish will pay those kind of prices for the Pac 10, Pac 12, or Pac anything..... Just how many expensive channels can carriers keep carrying and still keep prices down? Let Direct TV carry them, and keep their cost higher. That gives a choice to us all. I don't want to pay what my friends do for Direct because I can live without alot of the expensive sports channels. On the other side, they are willing to pay more to get them. So there is the choice.

You're really overly exaggerating the cost difference between DirecTV & Dish. When you're not receiving new sub discounts, the prices are very similar for similar packages and fees...off by a couple dollars.

If you stop responding to them or put them on ignore, then eventually they'll go away.

You make it sound like it is all DISH's fault! If AMC owned PAC-12 rights would you cut DISH a break?

Big Ten Network was added September 9th, 2007. Did you really expect DISH to know that PAC-12 would start their own network five years later?

There's no "fault" here... but Dish can't be surprised that Big Ten starts a network, and the other conferences see that and think "I want mine"... so whether they predicted the date or not, they have to have seen this coming.

Per the other thread, it looks like Dish might be considering the option of dropping Big Ten rather than picking up Pac-12!

well when it comes to the Big Ten network pending dispute, just let you know, it's co-owned by Fox and the Big Ten Conference, so that means we are in for yet another blackout dispute, and after the one we went thought in 2010 with Fox, which co-owns this network, we clearly will lose the Big Ten Network. if the Pac-12 network isn't co-owned by Disney, it might be co-owned by Fox, which would be their way to bundle Pac-12 Network with the Big Ten Network. meanwhile Disney/ESPN co-owns the The Longhorn Network with the University of Texas in Austin, which is pretty much the closest the Big XII has to it's own 24/7 RSN channel.

one story short, it's gonna be a long college football season for fans of the Texas Longhorns, a Big Ten or Pac-12 school or anyone who wants to see any game on ESPN-U in HD.

You're really overly exaggerating the cost difference between DirecTV & Dish. When you're not receiving new sub discounts, the prices are very similar for similar packages and fees...off by a couple dollars.

You are correct. I think what it means is DISH puts more in THEIR pocket.

I think we'll see both the BTN and the Pac-10 Network on both "D" and "E. Why? Because if "E" doesn't have them both you will see a sub exodus that will dwarf anything they've experienced from all of their other channel screw ups combined.

I think we'll see both the BTN and the Pac-10 Network on both "D" and "E. Why? Because if "E" doesn't have them both you will see a sub exodus that will dwarf anything they've experienced from all of their other channel screw ups combined.

It hasn't stopped Dish in New York. I know they don't have the Yankees or Mets there, not sure about MSG.

You are correct. I think what it means is DISH puts more in THEIR pocket.

If he did he would be incorrect ...

DirecTV charged an average $94.40 per customer per month 2Q12 vs $78.11 for DISH.DirecTV made $20.35 per customer per month 2Q12 vs $5.35 for DISH.(Note: Single quarter results. Over the past six years, DISH has averaged $6.04 and DirecTV has averaged $12.90 profit per month per customer.)

Nothing wrong with being profitable, but when one company is now making $15 more per customer than the other and currently charges $16.29 more per average customer it is fair to say that the customer's wallet is the source of the profit.

Part of that "D" average is because of the NFL package. Without it the two companies are much closer in cost per sub. Taking that adjusted rate per month I'd rather pay more for the "D" content but from Dish instead.

Dish and DirecTV's regular packages look close in price to me. What am I missing?

First of all, you're missing your own point when you use phrases like "DISH puts more in THEIR pocket". As shown, their profits are relatively low - and when providers ask for "a few pennies per day" that adds up. They have managed to keep their prices lower. Sometimes that means not having the higher priced channels as part of their packages.

What you may be missing are built in price increases ... contracts that specify a higher price be paid for the channel each year for the length of a long contract. DISH must adjust their prices to cover those automatic increases. Dropping a channel doesn't mean DISH's cost for other other channels doesn't keep going up.

And you may be missing replacement content ... in some cases DISH has replaced a dropped channel with another channel and has to pay the second channel. Any savings would be diminished (except for customers who subscribe to "everything" ... but those customers also get all the new channels and rate increases are often not as sharp).

I just switched to Dish back in July. I really kind of wish I hadn't. I like the Hopper and Sirius/XM, but I don't care for their games of chicken they seem to be playing. I knew they did it, and I guess I should have thought it through more.

I may be wrong, but I really get the feeling that Dish gets a pass for a lot of the crap they do under the "they are looking at for the consumer banner". I really don't they get ripped in this forum like they should, but it is your house, I am just visiting.

I had DirectTV for about 15 years. Just switched to Dish a couple of years ago. I compared pricing on similar packages every year, and for the same general packages pricing was very similar. I only switched, very reluctantly because I was very happy with DirectTV, when we moved to an area where DirectTV did not have the locals in HD and Dish did. (DirectTV has since picked them up.) The average price per sub and profit is almost entirely due to some of DirectTVs high end sports packages.

The trend I seem to be seeing with Dish is dropping channels and putting the savings in their pockets. First AMC and now potentially the big 10 network. Ugh.

I will say this about Dish and sports: they are more generous than most providers in our area when it comes to regional coverage. We are in the middle of nowhere, and we get Foxmw, which gives us KC and St. Louis coverage, Fox North, which gives us Minn coverage, and CSNCH, which give us Chicago coverage. Since we have fans of teams from all of those areas it's great. I'm a huge White Sox fan, so to live 8 hours away and still get them here is pretty awesome. By contrast, the local cable only gives you Fox North, and I'd have to check DirectTV but I doubt they are so generous.

I can pretty much assure you they ARE - you can check it here yourself:

That site gives me one channel (CSN Chicago) in Choice ($63.99 regular) unless I subscribe specifically to the Sports Pack or Premier. DISH also includes FSN Midwest in AT120+ ($49.99 regular).

BTW: The closest "apples to apples" is DISH AT200 for $59.99 vs DirecTV Choice for $63.99.AT250 for $69.99 vs Choice Xtra for $68.99 or Choice Ultimate for $74.99 would also be good for "channels for $$$" comparisons.

The low end AT120 $44.99 vs Entertainment $54.99 and high end AEP $104.99 vs Premier $114.99 have a larger price difference.